Narrative:

The student and I began the preflight at approximately XA00. After determining the aircraft was airworthy for flight, a brief discussion of WX, plan of action for the day and after reviewing any questions that the student had, we commenced a 1.4 hour dual instruction session. We practiced many normal takeoffs and lndgs, simulated engine failure, and a go around. The flight went well and we concurrently decided to solo him. The conditions at the time of the dual flight and solo flight came after winds calm, unlimited visibility, and sky clear. The dual flight (prior to solo) commenced on runway 2L and, after approximately 2-3 takeoff and landing cycles, the runway was switched while we were on the downwind to runway 20R. The student complied with the instruction to change runways and executed the requested 180 degree turn to re-enter the downwind with no apparent confusion. This type of decision making, along with an overall confidence and ability to control the aircraft, led me to believe the student was absolutely ready to solo. After the completion of the dual flight, we took a quick trip back to the ramp to sign paperwork. The solo flight began from the west ramp at approximately XC15-XC30. The student calmly called ground and requested 3 full stop taxi-backs. The student showed some nervousness while taxiing to the run-up area by taking the 'no name' taxiway to taxiway a (going toward runway 2L rather than runway 20R). Having realized his mistake (on his own) he corrected his mistake and taxied to the runway 20R run-up area. Unfortunately, upon reaching the run-up area, he didn't pull far enough into the run-up area. The ground controller then instructed him to re-enter the run-up area so that no part of the aircraft extended over the line. I believed the student could re-compose himself and continue the flight. I also believed all that could be gained by making him return to the ramp was to destroy his confidence. The student completed his run-up and called 'run-up complete' and then complied with the instruction to taxi to runway 20R and monitor tower (as is the local procedure). The student's takeoff, crosswind leg, downwind leg, and base leg looked great (from my vantage point). The approach and landing seemed slightly steep, however, not to an extreme degree. The round-out was fine. However, due to the higher descent rate (obviously caused by a steeper approach), the timing was off and the student landed completely flat. The flat landing induced a bounce (which I believe might have been aided by an overcorrecting on the flare) in which the nose began to drop. The second bounce landed on the nosewheel. The student then overcorrected, causing a third bounce. I lost view due to the terrain and other aircraft in the way. I assumed that the then terrified student must have slammed on the brakes (maybe in conjunction with some sort of 'wheel barreling') in which the airplane got sideways and went off the runway. Damage to the aircraft included sudden engine stoppage (bent propeller) and a bent nosewheel and constituted substantial damage. The student was near 21 hours and had completed nearly 50 lndgs. As an instructor, I will now recall a student to the ramp the min I see that same sort of nervousness occurred that was apparent from the taxiing mix-up. I will also find ways to test my students to see how they can handle extreme stress prior to solo. I will (especially for students that are solo) reinforce the go around if anything is wrong with the approach concept because, up until this point in time, I believed you learned something from every landing good of bad.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 STUDENT PLT, ON FIRST SOLO FLT, LOST ACFT CTL WHEN HE ALLOWED THE ACFT TO PORPOISE ON LNDG. THE ACFT HAD A PROP STRIKE, AND DAMAGED NOSE GEAR.

Narrative: THE STUDENT AND I BEGAN THE PREFLT AT APPROX XA00. AFTER DETERMINING THE ACFT WAS AIRWORTHY FOR FLT, A BRIEF DISCUSSION OF WX, PLAN OF ACTION FOR THE DAY AND AFTER REVIEWING ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE STUDENT HAD, WE COMMENCED A 1.4 HR DUAL INSTRUCTION SESSION. WE PRACTICED MANY NORMAL TKOFS AND LNDGS, SIMULATED ENG FAILURE, AND A GAR. THE FLT WENT WELL AND WE CONCURRENTLY DECIDED TO SOLO HIM. THE CONDITIONS AT THE TIME OF THE DUAL FLT AND SOLO FLT CAME AFTER WINDS CALM, UNLIMITED VISIBILITY, AND SKY CLR. THE DUAL FLT (PRIOR TO SOLO) COMMENCED ON RWY 2L AND, AFTER APPROX 2-3 TKOF AND LNDG CYCLES, THE RWY WAS SWITCHED WHILE WE WERE ON THE DOWNWIND TO RWY 20R. THE STUDENT COMPLIED WITH THE INSTRUCTION TO CHANGE RWYS AND EXECUTED THE REQUESTED 180 DEG TURN TO RE-ENTER THE DOWNWIND WITH NO APPARENT CONFUSION. THIS TYPE OF DECISION MAKING, ALONG WITH AN OVERALL CONFIDENCE AND ABILITY TO CTL THE ACFT, LED ME TO BELIEVE THE STUDENT WAS ABSOLUTELY READY TO SOLO. AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE DUAL FLT, WE TOOK A QUICK TRIP BACK TO THE RAMP TO SIGN PAPERWORK. THE SOLO FLT BEGAN FROM THE W RAMP AT APPROX XC15-XC30. THE STUDENT CALMLY CALLED GND AND REQUESTED 3 FULL STOP TAXI-BACKS. THE STUDENT SHOWED SOME NERVOUSNESS WHILE TAXIING TO THE RUN-UP AREA BY TAKING THE 'NO NAME' TXWY TO TXWY A (GOING TOWARD RWY 2L RATHER THAN RWY 20R). HAVING REALIZED HIS MISTAKE (ON HIS OWN) HE CORRECTED HIS MISTAKE AND TAXIED TO THE RWY 20R RUN-UP AREA. UNFORTUNATELY, UPON REACHING THE RUN-UP AREA, HE DIDN'T PULL FAR ENOUGH INTO THE RUN-UP AREA. THE GND CTLR THEN INSTRUCTED HIM TO RE-ENTER THE RUN-UP AREA SO THAT NO PART OF THE ACFT EXTENDED OVER THE LINE. I BELIEVED THE STUDENT COULD RE-COMPOSE HIMSELF AND CONTINUE THE FLT. I ALSO BELIEVED ALL THAT COULD BE GAINED BY MAKING HIM RETURN TO THE RAMP WAS TO DESTROY HIS CONFIDENCE. THE STUDENT COMPLETED HIS RUN-UP AND CALLED 'RUN-UP COMPLETE' AND THEN COMPLIED WITH THE INSTRUCTION TO TAXI TO RWY 20R AND MONITOR TWR (AS IS THE LCL PROC). THE STUDENT'S TKOF, XWIND LEG, DOWNWIND LEG, AND BASE LEG LOOKED GREAT (FROM MY VANTAGE POINT). THE APCH AND LNDG SEEMED SLIGHTLY STEEP, HOWEVER, NOT TO AN EXTREME DEGREE. THE ROUND-OUT WAS FINE. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE HIGHER DSCNT RATE (OBVIOUSLY CAUSED BY A STEEPER APCH), THE TIMING WAS OFF AND THE STUDENT LANDED COMPLETELY FLAT. THE FLAT LNDG INDUCED A BOUNCE (WHICH I BELIEVE MIGHT HAVE BEEN AIDED BY AN OVERCORRECTING ON THE FLARE) IN WHICH THE NOSE BEGAN TO DROP. THE SECOND BOUNCE LANDED ON THE NOSEWHEEL. THE STUDENT THEN OVERCORRECTED, CAUSING A THIRD BOUNCE. I LOST VIEW DUE TO THE TERRAIN AND OTHER ACFT IN THE WAY. I ASSUMED THAT THE THEN TERRIFIED STUDENT MUST HAVE SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES (MAYBE IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOME SORT OF 'WHEEL BARRELING') IN WHICH THE AIRPLANE GOT SIDEWAYS AND WENT OFF THE RWY. DAMAGE TO THE ACFT INCLUDED SUDDEN ENG STOPPAGE (BENT PROP) AND A BENT NOSEWHEEL AND CONSTITUTED SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE. THE STUDENT WAS NEAR 21 HRS AND HAD COMPLETED NEARLY 50 LNDGS. AS AN INSTRUCTOR, I WILL NOW RECALL A STUDENT TO THE RAMP THE MIN I SEE THAT SAME SORT OF NERVOUSNESS OCCURRED THAT WAS APPARENT FROM THE TAXIING MIX-UP. I WILL ALSO FIND WAYS TO TEST MY STUDENTS TO SEE HOW THEY CAN HANDLE EXTREME STRESS PRIOR TO SOLO. I WILL (ESPECIALLY FOR STUDENTS THAT ARE SOLO) REINFORCE THE GAR IF ANYTHING IS WRONG WITH THE APCH CONCEPT BECAUSE, UP UNTIL THIS POINT IN TIME, I BELIEVED YOU LEARNED SOMETHING FROM EVERY LNDG GOOD OF BAD.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.